The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparing the carbon budgets of boreal and temperate deciduous forest stands
Abstract
Boreal and temperate deciduous forests at northern mid-latitudes play an important role in the global carbon cycle. We analyze 3 years (1996-1998) of eddy-covariance carbon dioxide flux measurements from two contrasting deciduous forest ecosystems in the boreal and temperate regions of central Canada. The two forest stands have similar ages, heights, and leaf area indices but differ in species composition and climate. Mean annual net ecosystem productivity (NEP) was similar for the two ecosystems, varying between 0.7 and 2.7 t C·ha1 (boreal) and 0.6 and 2.4 t C·ha1 (temperate). In the boreal ecosystem, interannual differences in NEP were primarily controlled by early spring temperature. The warm spring of 1998 caused early leaf out and increased photosynthesis but had little effect on respiration. In the temperate ecosystem, the same warm spring not only caused early leaf out but also increased respiration and drought stress. The contrasting impact of the warm spring on annual NEP at the two sites illustrates the complexity of interpreting climatic impacts on the forest carbon balance. It also illustrates two competing influences of climate change on NEP: spring warming, which promotes photosynthesis and increases NEP, and increased soil temperature and drought, which promote respiration and reduce photosynthesis, thus reducing NEP. We discuss the need for a consistent data post-processing methodology in ecosystem intercomparisons. We also compare our results with a recent synthesis of data from European forests.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Baldocchi, D. (2008) · Australian Journal of Botany · doi:10.1071/bt07151 · Cited by 1,123
CO 2 balance of boreal, temperate, and tropical forests derived from a global database
LUYSSAERT, S., INGLIMA, I., JUNG, M., RICHARDSON, A. D., REICHSTEIN, M., PAPALE, D., PIAO, S. L., SCHULZE, E. ‐., WINGATE, L., MATTEUCCI, G., et al. (2007) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2007.01439.x · Cited by 1,010
Self-citationMassman, W. J., & Lee, X. (2002) · Agricultural and Forest Meteorology · doi:10.1016/s0168-1923(02)00105-3 · Cited by 687
Self-citationLeaf‐out phenology of temperate woody plants: from trees to ecosystems
Polgar, C. A., & Primack, R. B. (2011) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2011.03803.x · Cited by 553
Wilmking, M., Juday, G. P., Barber, V. A., & Zald, H. S. J. (2004) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2004.00826.x · Cited by 508
Metadata
- Authors
- Barr, A. G., Griffis, T. J., Black, T. A., Lee, X., Staebler, R. M., Fuentes, J. D., Chen, Z., & Morgenstern, K.
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Forest Research
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 2002-05-01
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 813-822
- ISSN
- 0045-5067 (ISSN-L)
- 1208-6037
- OpenAlex
- W2121149545
- Cited by
- 161
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.24
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparing the carbon budgets of boreal and temperate deciduous forest stands. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/x01-131
- The paper
- Barr, A. G., Griffis, T. J., Black, T. A., Lee, X., Staebler, R. M., Fuentes, J. D., Chen, Z., & Morgenstern, K. (2002). Comparing the carbon budgets of boreal and temperate deciduous forest stands. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. https://doi.org/10.1139/x01-131
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.